Posted on 12/25/2018 9:02:26 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
No, it was the allegations that he molested a 14 year old and attempted to rape an 18 year old.
Those are the two accusations that caused the problem, and both were made by kook women (one caught lying) dragged up by that Democrat activist. (I forget her name, but there are pictures of her with Hillary and Al Gore at fundraisers.)
Without those two serious accusations, the accusation that he dated 18 and 19 year old women while in his early 30s would not have amounted to anything.
The vicious, lying media bastards kept lumping the women who dated him as "accusers" with the two drug addled, promiscuous, suicidal kook bitches with wrecked lives, in an effort to make it appear that he was a serial rapist/molester.
I tried to point out at the time that all but those two crazies said he behaved like a "perfect gentleman", but most people either couldn't distinguish or refused to distinguish between a 30 year old man dating an 18-19 year old, and an accusation of rape and an accusation of molestation of a 14 year old.
Moore's campaign died on The Sean Hannity Show when Hannity asked yes or no if he courted teens while a 30-something grown man and Moore was unable to unequivocally deny this.
600,000+ Trump voters stayed home. The sad irony is that most of them thought Moore would still win without their votes.
Well what do you know? That backstabbing piece of sh*t Richard Shelby only got 967,861 votes when he was elected in 2010. Moore got 1,051,627 in 2012, and that's even with the rest of the Alabama judiciary taking out full page ads urging people to vote for his Opponent!
So Moore beats Richard Shelby in vote count, yet you are trying to portray *HIM* as the problem?
No, the problem is Republican backstabbers and lying media. Same problem we always have.
I think what sunk him was his appearance on Hannity. When Moore was asked about the “accusations” he had the same “deer in the headlights” look that Ted Kennedy did back in 1976 when Dan Blather asked him why he wanted to be president!
You misstate what happened. Moore was accused of molesting a 14 year old girl, (Leigh Corfman) Moore was going on Hannity to deny that claim. Hannity hits him with a false equivalency that dating 18 year old girls makes him guilty of molesting 14 year old girls.
Hannity kept insisting that dating 18 year old women proves him guilty of molesting the 14 year old, and Moore was absolutely not ready to respond to a question framed in such a way that makes him guilty of the heinous thing by admitting to the lesser thing.
Moore did date teenagers in his 30s, but the serious accusation was that he molested a girl. Hannity should not have accepted that lying Washington Post bitch's allegation that the one thing was equal to the other.
But Hannity did, and presented a very unfair situation to Roy Moore in that interview.
600,000+ Trump voters stayed home. The sad irony is that most of them thought Moore would still win without their votes.
Which means absolutely nothing. In fact, it is deceitful to make such a claim. Off year elections *NEVER* garner the same numbers of voters as Presidential elections. Probably 500,000 of that was going to stay home anyways, and so you are trying to blame Moore for what is mostly normal in an off year election.
As I posted above, Richard Shelby got 967,861 in 2010 off year election. Trump got 1,318,255. Does that mean Richard Shelby got 350,394 less votes than Trump? Well yes, but to make that claim is very misleading, verging on intentionally deceitful. Moore got 1,051,627 in 2012, which beats Richard Shelby in 2010 by quite a lot.
1,325,868 was the total number of votes cast in Alabama's special senate election. Trump got 1,318,255. Trump got almost as many as both candidates put together!
Let's say you were going onto Hannity's show to answer claims that you molested a 14 year old girl. Hannity then immediately hits you with "If you admit to dating 18 year old women, we will consider you guilty of molesting a 14 year old girl, and attempting to rape a 16 year old girl."
And you know you dated 18 year old women.
Yes, it would make most any man feel as if they were a deer caught in the headlights.
I heard the Hannity interview. That is exactly how he framed the debate. Moore admits to dating teenagers, Hannity was going to regard the allegation that he molested a 14 year old as true.
Two different things, and Hannity lumped them together. He put Moore into an unwinnable situation.
Moore or his people should have innocuous stock answers for both or he shouldn’t have gone on the show. It doesn’t make any difference whose show, you have to have answers to those types of things and the ability to think on your feet to frame them. You don’t have answers, don’t run. You can’t frame the answers properly , again don’t run! He was a poor candidate, probably way over confident. He was a known commodity to the Alabama voter and clearly he couldn’t energize them. I am tired of the excuses for him!
They didn't expect Hannity to hit them with that false comparison. Moore was from an older generation that didn't see anything wrong with 30 something year old men dating 18 year old women. Go back to the early 20th century, and it wasn't uncommon to have even worse age disparity between the men and women.
Often times young men could not get themselves established sufficiently to be able to support a wife until they had reached their 30s, and a lot of women of that era were married off at 14 or even younger.
Different times, different culture.
Hannity just couldn't understand this background because he grew up in an entirely different situation. As far as he was concerned, anyone dating girls that were 10 or more years younger was a creep, and that is exactly how he framed the interview. Moore wasn't ready to deal with it because he never expected to get hit that way.
You can’t frame the answers properly , again don’t run!
When you have a media-weapon-system that has unfairly framed the entire debate to make you appear to be a Rapist (as they did with Brett Kavanaugh) You are already in territory you should not have had to deal with.
The fact that this was even a topic was the result of a deliberate attack against him by the combined forces of the Democrat party and their media-weapon-system.
You can't declare someone a poor candidate because the media successfully portrays them as a creep, or a racist, or as a rapist, or whatever they are accusing them of.
Was Senator George Allen a "Poor Candidate"? Did he not adequately anticipate that the word "Macaca" would be used successfully to portray him as a racist?
You are looking at the wrong cause of the loss. The loss was caused by the media-weapon-system and weak, pussified backstabbing Republicans like Richard Shelby (Who got on television and urged everyone in Alabama to vote against Moore.) and Jeff Flake, who made a very public announcement that he was supporting the Democrat, and the National party who first jerked all of Moore's funding, which made it appear he was guilty, and then belatedly resuming it.
I am tired of the excuses for him!
And I am tired of people blaming him for a loss that was caused by a weaponized media attack machine and Republican backstabbing.
Moore won by almost 400,000 extra votes in 2012, but somehow people keep wanting to spread the accusation that he was a "Poor candidate". Anyone who gets the media attack machine treatment becomes a "poor candidate".
Again, look at former US Senator George Allen who was taken down by this very same attack machine.
Ok
I was in a Virginia when the Macaca gaffe occurred. I followed Allen from his House beginnings all the way to his Senatorship. He was not a good candidate then, he was “ok”. It was after the first Macaca statement where he showed how untalented a candidate he was. Rather then ignore he kept digging. Rule of thumb in PR: If you feel you have to explain. Don’t! The more you explain the deeper the hole! He kept digging!
Like Ted, Like Allen, Like Moore the more you talk the more ridiculous you look! Its not fair but it the husting game!
And a endless deluge of historical facts don’t matter!
This isn’t grad school and no one is writing a paper.
People keep drawing the wrong conclusions about why we lose. We do not lose because we have "poor candidates." We lose, because ordinary or marginal candidates are deliberately attacked viciously until the public regards them as "poor candidates."
We should be trying to stick a sword through the guts of the existing media-weapon-system instead of constantly trying to find exceptional candidates that can finesse their way through it.
We can't get a Trump for every race. We have to settle for ordinary people who aren't so clever as to know how to defeat the media-weapon-monster.
If you keep expecting candidates to get everything absolutely right, you will end up with Democrat officeholders for which the media simply doesn't care if they get anything right.
Our problem is the media and backstabbers. Our problem is not "poor candidates." Chris McDaniel wasn't a poor candidate either, but he was destroyed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.